Improving Public Transport

Polly Billington Excerpts

Thursday 5th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Dyke]

I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend. Integration between public transport and active travel is vital. He and I live in a beautiful part of the world, which frankly more people should get out and enjoy on two wheels or on two feet.

There are huge opportunities to improve bus services around the country, and especially in Somerset, where they are almost endless—mind you, the starting point is quite low. In 2022, Somerset county council’s bus service improvement plan bid acknowledged that Somerset had the worst-rated bus service in the country at the time, and that was after 13 years of lack of investment under a Conservative-led administration. Bus provision is poor and unreliable.

For example, the 54 bus route, which runs through Glastonbury and Somerton connecting Taunton to Yeovil, lacks an evening or Saturday service. That leaves people who might work unpredictable or unsociable hours unable to trust the bus service and reliant on a private car. Cherie in Glastonbury told me that she has to wait for an hour for her bus home from work, so despite finishing at 5 pm she does not get home until nearly half-past 7. If she were to drive, it would take her 10 minutes.

The unreliability of buses combined with the poor state of bus stops and public information provides a major hurdle for bus users. I thank Somerset bus partnership for its unrelenting work to improve that, having held more than 100 bus stalls to inform local people about their nearest services, filling an information gap that has sadly been left by the service providers. Most bus stops do not have a printed sign timetable or real-time information, and often poor mobile connectivity in rural areas makes it difficult for people to access information online. That was confirmed recently by Iain, who told me that the printed bus timetable in Glastonbury is barely legible. That is so disappointing. Even small interventions could create vastly important changes that would support bus services.

A Campaign for Better Transport survey has found that 52% of people would use more buses if they had better information at bus stops, but the onus on providing that information is sadly lacking. Unlike rail, where there are national standards that mandate that a certain level of information is provided at stations, there is no equivalent for bus stops. Every rail station in Britain has provision for real-time information, but we are a million miles away from achieving similar provision for our bus network. Bus users need certainty, but the availability of up-to-date, co-ordinated information on the bus network is lacking at the best of times and non- existent at the worst of times. That must change.

One of the major barriers preventing simple things like clear information is the fractured nature of bus funding. The previous Government’s competitive strategy turned funding into a postcode lottery, with only 40% of eligible local authorities receiving any of the £1.2 billion of BSIP funding announced in 2021. The Liberal Democrats have been calling for a simplified system of bus funding that could deliver routes where there is local need. Funding is unequal and fractured. Somerset Council receives around £25 per head of funding for buses, yet 12 local authorities across the country get double that amount.

The former Transport Secretary recently announced a big increase in bus funding, with Somerset council receiving £6.5 million. The increase is very welcome, but it will not go far enough to fix the gaping holes in our bus provision. Somerset council also awaits guidance from the Government on what the money can be used for, so that it can prioritise where the need is greatest. The previous Transport Secretary was keen for local authorities to decide where the money is most needed, and I hope that that remains the case.

The Government’s vision for the future of buses appears to be based around franchising and delivering London-style buses around the country. As I stated, better buses are key to achieving a modal shift, hitting net zero targets and delivering opportunity and growth. But with the local authority landscape as it is, franchising simply is not an option in rural areas. If there is not significant funding, franchising is no more than a pipe dream for rural authorities. Somerset council has only three officers to deal with public transport, which is not enough people power to run such an operation. That is not an anomaly, but a local authority standard. If the current situation does not work for rural areas, what is the vision?

I hope that the recent removal of the £2 bus fare cap is not the start of things to come for rural areas. Given the nature of rural bus routes, journeys are longer and people travel further. If the now £3 cap were to be removed, it would be disastrous for rural areas, as prices would rise beyond affordable rates very quickly and disincentivise regular bus patronage. After the 50% fare increase, one constituent from North Cadbury wrote to me concerned about the impact it will have on the future of the No. 1 bus from Yeovil to Shepton Mallet, and the No. 58 in Wincanton, which are both facing cancellation. Those routes, and many like them, are vital for social and economic outcomes.

In the last Session, I introduced the Public Transport (Rural Areas) Bill, which would have created minimum service levels, ensuring that residents can access sites of employment, education and leisure. I believe that those measures are truly needed for rural areas.

[Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)]

Does the hon. Lady accept that the previous Government had not actually funded the £2 fare cap beyond the current period? Therefore, we have a cap on bus fares so that people do not to end up with exponential fare rises in the next spending period.

[Sarah Dyke]

The point is that if prices go up any further, patronage on buses will go down, and in rural areas we travel further and longer. It is difficult to incentivise people to use buses in rural areas, so we need to get this right, and increasing fares will not encourage more people to get out of their cars and on to public transport.

Local authorities have a duty to outline routes that cannot run commercially but are vital to improving social outcomes or supporting economic activity, but there is no duty on them to fund those routes. After the general election, there were suggestions that the Government would create safeguards to make it harder for routes to be cut, and the better bus Bill is the perfect opportunity to deliver that. The previous Government committed to delivering guidance on the meaning and role of socially necessary services, expanding the category to include economically necessary services. But unsurprisingly, they failed to provide it, leaving much-needed bus routes in danger. I hope the Minister will take this up and provide some guidance.

Improving public transport is essential. The Government have stated their intention to improve it but so much remains unclear, especially for rural areas, which see poor services and high costs. Unfortunately, without investment and smart choices, that will continue to be the reality. The reversal of these trends is crucial, and I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing the debate. I am grateful in particular to my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer), who showed the depth of her knowledge and understanding of this important matter. I have an observation about the Opposition Benches, however, Madam Deputy Speaker. It appears that you wait all day for a Tory MP to turn up to a debate on public transport—and none do.

[Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)]

indicated dissent.

[Ms Billington]

With the exception, of course, of the shadow Minister—who is obliged to be here.

I am also grateful that the scope of the debate was widened beyond the west country, as I represent the second easternmost constituency in the country: the far eastern corner of the Isle of Thanet. Hundreds of years ago, up to Tudor times, we were cut off from the rest of the country by the River Wantsum. I fear that the legacy of the Conservative party is that they tried their best to effectively reinstate our island status by gutting our public transport and cutting us off from the rest of the country.

Fortunately, however, when it comes to trains, there is a Labour Government legacy, thanks in particular to the support and involvement of my Labour predecessor, Stephen Ladyman—a former MP for South Thanet and Transport Minister—and, of course, of the late, great John Prescott. They made enormous progress on connectivity and public transport, salvaging the high-speed rail project from which my constituency benefits so much as it links us to London and the rest of the UK, with all the economic benefits that follow. I and others, including my constituents and colleagues from across Kent, strongly advocate for the return of international services to Ashford on the high-speed rail line, because of all the economic benefits that would deliver.

It is already on the record that Kent saw a massive reduction in bus services under the previous Government, with 20% fewer bus miles than under the previous Labour Government. The Government’s announcement on bus funding is extremely welcome, especially as Kent has received the highest proportion of funding in the whole of the south-east, at £23 million. That funding, combined with the new powers for local authorities, means that Tory-run Kent county council has the ability to reverse the cut in bus miles, and I implore it to use the powers and money to do so.

There may be Members on the other side of the Chamber—it is difficult to see any—who are entirely unfamiliar with bus timetables as they all stick to their cars. However, in Broadstairs, where huge swathes of the town have no access to bus services at all, an older person would be left to walk, cycle or—much more likely—rely on lifts from friends, family or taxis. The sheer expense of relying on taxis as a primary mode of transport is enormous, unsustainable and fundamentally unfair. This has created a situation where, if someone becomes ill and is in need of NHS services, they are forced to pay for a taxi when they may not be able to afford one, or—as often happens—simply go without medical treatment.

This is particularly challenging, as a lot of NHS services in East Thanet have been moved inland. That is an all-too-common issue in coastal communities such as mine; for example, in east Kent, our orthopaedic centre is located in Canterbury. There is now no direct bus from Broadstairs or Ramsgate to Canterbury, so people with mobility issues face barriers to treatment. For some, making that extended journey means taking time off work. That has ramifications for our economy, as people who need treatment have to take time off work when they otherwise would not. That often forces people to simply go without treatment in the early stages of their illness, which can only make them sicker and place more costs on the NHS further down the line. Not only is this damaging to the sick people themselves, it stunts the economy and puts excess strain on public services.

This is not the only way in which a lack of public transport options hurts our economy; it also impacts the regeneration of our local high streets. I have many constituents who would much prefer to do their shopping in person on our local high streets, contributing to our local economy, but who now feel that they have no option but to switch to online shopping because of the lack of transport options, since they do not drive. Let me tell you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that when I have suggested it might be possible to have a bus connecting Ramsgate train station to Ramsgate high street, you would have thought from some people’s faces that I was asking to bend the laws of physics. We have been so used to the idea that this is simply impossible. Reliable, affordable, accessible and safe transport is a matter of social and economic justice. I applaud all the actions that the Government are taking to regenerate our high streets, which is a major issue in East Thanet that the Ramsgate empty shops campaign is seeking to work with the Government on, but if people cannot get to those high streets, I fear we will not make the progress that we rightly want.

Although we have a significant new Secretary of State with responsibility for this area, we also need to think about the legacy of previous Secretaries of State—in particular, Barbara Castle. When she was first appointed by Harold Wilson, she turned around to the Prime Minister and said, “You do know, Harold, that I can’t drive?” In the late ‘60s, this was seen as hampering her ability to be a suitable Transport Secretary, but in his wisdom, Harold Wilson said, “Yes, Barbara—exactly.” That is the point. Think of the changes that she was able to make, not only to public transport but to road safety, giving us a strong legacy that has lasted all my lifetime and, I hope, much further beyond. Good public transport is fundamental to achieving the Government’s missions, in the same way that it is fundamental to us being able to live our own lives and achieve our own ambitions: simply to get up, go to work, access the services we need, get home safely and see the people we love.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

I commend the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on her excellent maiden speech, and congratulate her on having the oldest road in her constituency—and doubtless, the oldest potholes as well.

I also commend my hon. Friends the Members for Horsham (John Milne), for Guildford (Zöe Franklin), for Thornbury and Yate (Claire Young) and for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) and the hon. Members for Swindon North (Will Stone), for Stroud (Dr Opher), for Leeds South West and Morley (Mr Sewards), for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur), for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) and for East Thanet (Ms Billington), who spoke with one voice on the dire state of public transport in many of our rural areas. I agree with my friend, the hon. Member for Croydon East (Natasha Irons): before becoming transport spokesman, I did not realise how lucky we were in London. Although our constituents have legitimate complaints at times, we do not know how lucky we are. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke), and I echo her question to the Minister regarding the disruption to commuters from the south-west caused by the HS2 works on Old Oak Common. What can be done to minimise that disruption?

As we have heard from colleagues across the House, the current state of public transport simply is not good enough. Ticket prices are too high, services are too unreliable, infrastructure is too old and capacity is too meagre—and that is just for those who have access to public transport. Too many parts of our country have no meaningful access to public transport whatsoever. After years of routes being cut and timetables being foreshortened, many people no longer have access to a regular bus service despite living many miles distant from any rail network. This is hampering our economy, holding back local communities and damaging our high streets. Our public transport system should be the engine of growth and opportunity, not an impediment to them. If we are to reach the Government targets on economic growth and net zero we must take rapid and urgent steps to improve our public transport provision. We simply do not have time to tarry.

Let me be clear: my party and I have huge sympathy for the Minister, the Secretary of State and the Government. Everyone knows they inherited a mess from the previous regime’s chaos and missed opportunities. Years of under-investment, chopping, changing and rudderless leadership have left our public transport in turmoil, and I appreciate and publicly acknowledge the new Government’s worthy intentions and evident desire to improve the situation.

My party consequently welcomes the Government’s commitment to long overdue rail reform. I am glad to see the first green shoots of positive change. Ensuring HS2 reaches Euston in the first phase of the project is critical to achieving tangible benefits from what was in danger of becoming an expensive folly, while recent talk of an integrated national transport strategy shows that this Government appreciate that something needs to change.

We welcome the recent announcements on buses, too; as we have heard today from so many colleagues, they are critical to many areas—we know you get it. As hon. Friends so eloquently argued, despite buses being the most utilised form of public transport in the country, they are regularly not given the attention or funding they deserve, so thank you for that.

So far so good, then. However—there is always a “however”—although the Department for Transport is onside, I am not so sure that the Chancellor is, with her real-terms cuts to the Department’s day-to-day and capital budgets. If she is serious about growing the economy, she needs to be serious about properly funding the transport system on which it is built, rather than cutting budgets and making up the shortfall by hiking bus fares by up to 50% and an above-inflation increase in the cost of travel by train.

[Ms Billington]

The hon. Gentleman was not in his place at the time, and indeed neither was I, but it is worthwhile looking at the verdict of another transport nerd, a journalist from the Transport Times, back in 2015, who looked at exactly what happened when the Liberal Democrats did have an opportunity to do something about rural buses:

In county after county, cuts in rural bus service support have been severe. City deals may have been welcomed, but the idea that local government might be trusted to raise its own funding and decide on priorities has slipped further into the mists of history.

I just think it is worth reminding the House of that fact.

[Mr Kohler]

We are talking about now, and we are talking about the fact that you have reduced the bus fare cap.

--- Later in debate ---

[Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on successfully applying for the debate, and I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting it. Public transport is an indispensable part of our national life, playing a vital role in our commercial, social and economic existence.

We have had an interesting debate this afternoon, with noteworthy contributions from the hon. Members for Glastonbury and Somerton, for Horsham (John Milne), for Guildford (Zöe Franklin), for Thornbury and Yate (Claire Young) and for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) as well as just now from the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) from the Liberal Democrats. From the Government Benches, the first speech was the maiden speech of the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer). It was a thoughtful speech about bus use. I am sure that she will serve her constituents diligently in her time in this place, and I wish her well. She was followed by some capable contributions from the hon. Members for Swindon North (Will Stone), for Stroud (Dr Opher), for Leeds South West and Morley (Mr Sewards), for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur), for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae), for Croydon East (Natasha Irons) and for East Thanet (Ms Billington).

I will begin by commenting on the previous Conservative Government’s time in office. It may have escaped the attention of hon. Members that between 2010 and 2024, the Conservative Government spent more than £100 billion operating and enhancing our railways. This allowed the completion of major projects including Crossrail, Thameslink and major upgrades to the east coast main line, the greater Anglia main line, the midland main line and the great western main line. We committed £36 billion to the Network North programme, which, unless the Labour Government stop it, will deliver long-term transformative transport projects that will benefit a great many people in the north of England. The programme is under review by the Government, with no guarantee that any of it will be taken forward. Obviously, we call on the Government to honour the programme in full.

We electrified over 1,200 miles of track, compared with the mere 63 miles electrified in the 13 years of the previous Labour Government. Some 75% of rail journeys are now taken on electrified tracks. We sought schemes that would reconnect communities to our railways, providing new stations for passengers to use, such as the proposed new station at Edginswell in Torbay, which would complement the delivery of a new station at Marsh Barton near Exeter, and would particularly serve the needs of Torbay hospital. I know that Torbay council is a keen advocate for that, and I hope that the Labour Government will offer the same commitment to it that we did.

To support our bus networks, we invested an unprecedented amount of over £3.5 billion in the bus sector from March 2020 to support its recovery from the pandemic. We provided £525 million of funding to deliver 4,000 new British-built electric or hydrogen buses, and we extended the “get around for £2” scheme until the end of 2024, capping hundreds of single bus fares and helping passengers reliant on buses with the cost of travel—a scheme that we pledged to maintain for the entirety of this Parliament.

I also remind the House of some facts that were curiously missing from the speeches of some hon. Members, particularly those sitting on the Government Benches. Let us turn our gaze to Wales, where Labour has been in power for a quarter of a century. The number of journeys taken on local buses has declined by almost a quarter in the past decade, with a severe impact on those in the most rural areas. The Welsh Labour Administration have spent £40 million on rolling out 20 mph speed limits to try to force motorists on to public transport that the Labour Administration themselves have made less reliable, less regular and less affordable.

Let us look at London, which has been blighted by the leadership of Sadiq Khan for the past eight and a half years. London’s mayor recently spent £6.3 million of public money on yet more virtue signalling, renaming London overground lines—something that I am sure commuters thanked him for last week when the Elizabeth line was suspended and five underground lines faced severe delays. From a man who promised to roll up his sleeves and ensure no more transport strikes, we have seen more than 130 days of strikes during his term of office.

We know what the Labour party promised the voters of this country. In its manifesto, it pledged new infrastructure, an overhaul of Britain’s railways and certainty for car manufacturers. It promised a utopian system of public transport. But the methods by which the Government have set out to achieve that have been depressingly predictable. One of the Labour Government’s first acts was to provide train drivers with inflation-busting pay rises, without securing any productivity improvements for passengers at all. That bribe to the unions has, entirely predictably, failed to prevent repeated threats of further strike action.

Then, as part of the Welsh Government’s ongoing war against rural communities, they cut £1.3 billion-worth of road improvement schemes. The Government then increased the previous Conservative Government’s £2 bus fare cap to £3, increasing fares on hundreds of bus routes across the country. [Interruption.] Totally predictably, I get heckled about it not being paid for. As hon. Members will be aware once they have been in this place for a little longer, Government schemes are funded for particular periods of time, and then the funding is reviewed. The new £3 bus far cap, costing bus users 50% more than the previous cap, is guaranteed only until the end of next year, whereas the Conservative party’s manifesto commitment was to retain the cap at £2 for the whole of the Parliament.

Finally, and perhaps most notably, the Government have introduced and passed the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Act 2024. Instead of implementing the measured and sensible reforms set out in the Williams-Shapps review, the Government have passed an Act that will neither improve passenger experience nor make significant savings. Indeed, it may prove to cost the taxpayer significantly more. The Government insist that savings to the taxpayer will amount to £150 million because of the removal of fees paid to train operating companies. Even if that is correct, it will amount to a saving of a mere 0.6% of what is currently spent on the railways, and even that tiny figure is in doubt. Analysis conducted by rail partners suggested that removing the incentive to control costs could lead to annual subsidies being at least £1 billion higher by the end of this Parliament.

From whatever angle one looks at it, it is hard to see this Act as anything other than an ideological move—one that has more to do with attempting to appease the radical elements of the Labour party, hungry for old-fashioned, hard-left policies, than the good of the passenger and the taxpayer.

[Ms Billington]

I just wanted to give the hon. Gentleman the opportunity to confirm that the Tory Government were perfectly comfortable with public ownership of train operating companies as long as they belonged to Governments of other countries in Europe.

[Gareth Bacon]

The previous Government were prepared to do what works, rather than follow ideology in spite of evidence to the contrary.

I have been the shadow Transport Secretary for 31 days and I am already on my second Secretary of State. I have known the new Secretary of State for almost two decades, since our time as councillors representing our respective London boroughs on the London Councils transport and environment committee. She is not in her place today—Secretaries of State cannot be everywhere; that is why they have junior Ministers. I am sure that the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood), will ably deputise for her this afternoon.

I crossed paths with the new Secretary of State when I was Conservative leader on the London Assembly and she was appointed the deputy Mayor for Transport. Unfortunately, during her time at City Hall, London witnessed 28 strikes on Transport for London services, a 77% increase in complaints about TfL over three years, an extension of the hated ultra low emission zone, and, perhaps most concerning of all, a £4 billion overspend and three-year delay in the opening of the Elizabeth line. In defence of the right hon. Lady, though, the buck for all those failings does not stop with her—it stops with the Mayor of London. The right hon. Lady is, in fact, somebody for whom I have a high personal regard, and I look forward to welcoming her to her place.

It is fair to say that the Conservatives have doubts about the start made by this Government. However, having said all that, I emphasise that His Majesty’s Opposition will not oppose the Government just for the sake of it. I do not believe that a single Member of this House wants a public transport system that fails. As I said at the outset, public transport is an indispensable part of our national life, and a successful transport system is vital to both our present and our future. If the Government get things right, we will acknowledge that. Where they get them wrong, we will continue to hold them to account.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)]

I thank the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing this important debate on improving public transport. I believe we have reached our destination, Madam Deputy Speaker, having heard the last of the Labour maiden speeches, and of course we have saved one of the best for last. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on her fantastic contribution, and very much look forward to working with her in her capacity as a member of the Transport Committee. I also thank the other hon. Members who have spoken for their insightful points. I am pleased to respond for the Government, and will do my best to address the issues that they have raised.

I start my response by emphasising that this Government are putting the needs of passengers front and centre of our transport reforms. We fully recognise the importance of public transport to our communities in rural areas, towns and cities. Delivered well, it enables people to access work and education opportunities, and to access the shops, leisure activities and essential services that they need. It can sustain and improve economic growth and productivity, unlock housing and commercial development opportunities, and connect people to each other, to businesses and markets, and to international gateways.

However, there is lots of work to be done to improve our public transport. Many people and places suffer from poor connectivity and challenging journeys, which impact both their quality of life and their access to opportunities. That is why the Government are focusing on improving performance on the railways and driving forward rail reform; improving bus services and growing bus usage across the country; transforming infrastructure, so that it works for the whole country; promoting social mobility; and tackling regional inequalities. We have been making progress. Last week, the Government set out their plan to develop an integrated national transport strategy, which will set out how all modes of transport should be designed, built and operated to better serve all the people who use them and enable them to live a fulfilling life.

To kick-start that process, on 28 November the Department launched a public call for ideas, seeking to capture people’s views and experiences of transport across England and what could be done to improve it. Delivering an effective, efficient and integrated public transport system that meets the regional and national needs of people, wherever they live and work, will play a vital role in delivering the missions of this Government.

[Ms Billington]

My hon. Friend is talking about the regional and national economic growth strategies. I urge him and his friends in the Department to consider whether we need a strategy for public transport in our coastal communities. They suffer from poor connectivity, which reduces our ability to grow our economy all year round.

[Simon Lightwood]

Having grown up in a coastal community, I understand that they have unique challenges. I will of course take that point away to the Department.

The important work to improve services has already begun. We started reforming transport on day one after the general election. Take buses, the most commonly used mode of public transport in Britain. The Government have ambitious plans to improve services and grow passenger numbers. We know how important bus services are to communities up and down the country, particularly in rural areas, where, for many, buses can be a lifeline, and the only way of getting around and accessing vital services.

--- Later in debate ---

[Simon Lightwood]

I will make sure that I pass that request to the Minister with responsibility for rail, who I am sure will be pleased to meet you.

Within this Parliament, all passenger service operations will have completed the transition to being managed by Great British Railways, which we will establish as the directing mind for the railway by introducing further legislation during this Session. Great British Railways will ensure the highest standards of customer service and operational performance, and will simplify the railways, bringing together the delivery of passenger services, infrastructure, and responsibility for planning and the use of the network. It will bring an end to years of fragmentation and waste. However, we are not waiting for this further legislation. We have already brought key parts of the rail industry together as Shadow Great British Railways, which is working to improve services, unblock barriers to delivery, and move the rail network towards greater financial sustainability.

Although we must and will improve the railways in the short term, we must also think about the long term. We are committed to setting out a long-term rail strategy that will provide a framework for the industry over the next 30 years. We will work with stakeholders to ensure that the strategy maximises the benefits of rail for everyone, because improvements have to benefit everyone who uses our public transport system. This Government want everyone to have access to public transport, and are committed to supporting improvements to services so that they are more inclusive and enable everyone to travel safely, confidently and with dignity.

[Ms Billington]

I am particularly struck by what my hon. Friend is saying about making sure that everybody has access to what they need. He will have heard what I said about accessing healthcare via public transport. As we are talking about integrating our transport strategy into other strategies that might achieve our overall Government missions, will due regard be given to where existing health services are provided when making decisions about where we will put infrastructure?

[Simon Lightwood]

You make a powerful point. I would encourage you to make a submission to the integrated transport—